The question has come about from a little chat I had about salt to be added into cooking food.
Unfortunately, I have no money to buy salt, so I say. The lady looks forlorn and says nothing.
Cooks the food without salt. She doesn’t eat because she’ll not eat food without salt.
Then a discussion ensues. ‘You are a man you should have money at all times’ she says. I say ‘this is the one time I have no money’. She says ‘I don’t believe you.’
Then I ask, ‘why didn’t you buy the salt? I know you have the money.’ She responds ‘Mine is female money. You the man are supposed to bring and pay for everything at home.’
I am gobsmacked. The lady has money to buy salt but will not buy it because I have no money to buy salt.
Herein is the quandary. I am not at home neither am I obliged to buy the salt because this is not my residence. I am a visitor okay.
I wonder are such matters which seem minor in the scheme of things bring discordant in a home. Can the aspect of the man not having money to buy salt really make or break a home? Whatever happened to partnerships. Is it only give, give society that it has come down too?
It is heart wrenching if the foundation of any form of relationship is reduced to money and lack thereof.
Totally flabbergasted. Now I know what to do next time. Have my own salt in the drawer and she can cook saltless food. I’ll add into my food at my leisure. I will be visiting this place a lot more often therefore I will do the cub scout motto of be prepared.
Not very happy person at this point in time.
The dynamics of gender are not lost on me but I am finding them ever the more complex. How one wants to make a point in regards to gender roles about unspoken rules baffles me immensely. How then can the women be emancipated if they still think in a dependency format rather than the independent format? Do the women play the gender roles because society dictates or because family dictates?
For once I am lost. So, lost.